NYPD is testing a virtual pat down device

NYPD made public that they ar testing a virtual pat down device using technology that detects terahertz, which is the natural energy people and inanimate objects emit. Once something obstructs the radiation, like a concealed weapon, the device "highlights" that object so it is in clear view.

The scanners are worrying individuals who believe this technology violates their Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

The gun scanning technology will help lessen the need for NYPD's use of Stop and Frisk procedures that allowed officers to stop New Yorkers for random street interrogations or searches. In 2011, about 600,000-plus New Yorkers were stopped.

If authorized to carry the person would not be detained. If illegal then they would be detained and the gun taken off the street.

There are hundreds of articles on this subject on the web for further reading.

Jan 31 2013:
As much as I know about the US Arms Act, it is not very difficult to get a firearms license, so what is the use of such a scanning device but the vague hope, that mainly 'illegally' weapons are the truly harmful ones? Has this been statistically confirmed? And if so, what makes the 'bad guys' to shy the registration? And what about plastic guns in the shape of a cell-phone? Also detectable?

100% of safety only comes by 0% of personal freedom, at least theoretically. Practically, any percentage unequal to zero is one 'year' closer to Orwell's 1984, a fact, 'the land of the free' ought to consider ... :o)

Jan 31 2013:
Lejan, I like your approach. I suspect that the terahertz theory applies to all solid objects. The liberals have tried for years to disarm America. This year the tactic is the dead bodies of children and a shot Representative. As for the firearms license ... I think the underground does not want the trace anywhere around them.

Orwell is no longer a writer but has elevated to the prophet status.

As for disguised weapons ... well you can't have everything ... one step at a time.

Jan 29 2013:
So an officer supposedly needs a warrant to search my home but they can stop me on the street on a whim and handle my body even if I've done nothing? That alone is a clear violation of the 4th ammendment. As far as carrying weapons on the street goes, that is protected by the second ammendment and those carrying on NY streets are in compliance with the highest law in the land. The cops do not have the right to search anyone in any way without a warrant or probable cause

Jan 30 2013:
Robert ... you beat a dead horse. It must not be "obviously unconstitutional" and further what makes you think that this has not been challenged and upheld. Do you for one minute believe that the ACLU would not have been on it like stink on droppings if it had a glimer of a case. Even the "sheep" of New York are as aware of the law as the place you fail to post in your bio.

This will cut a substantial number of the 600,000 stop and frisks conducted and help to remove guns and real and potential law breakers from the streets.

Jan 29 2013:
Sorry if I repeated a David Letterman joke. Although i haven't visited NYC in decades Their Mayor Bloomburg has tried to discourage his city's inhabitants from ruining their health with huge sodas. Sorry Kate. We didn't get a number of the jokes in Mad Max years ago.

Jan 28 2013:
Isn't the question really about Law Enforcement? IF it is against the law to carry a gun then anyone found to be carrying one should be subjected to due process of law. Then we must ask how were they "found" to be carrying a gun? The 4th Amendment controls the lawful methods available to law enforcement. If instituted and subsequently ruled unconstitutional the technology would be discarded. Police can PASSIVELY monitor my driving habits, why not my gun carrying habits too? IF it is not against the law to drive fast why would cops have radar guns? If it is not illegal to carry a gun then there is no application for this new technology other than in special, controlled access situations.

Jan 28 2013:
Why not tag us like cattle with location sensors and place cameras in our houses too.
Afterall, if someone has a gun and gets away then we'd need to find him + its at home where all the guns and drugs are stored, right?..

Exactly how many more steps are there between
'Its all about safety' and 'We're protecting you from yourselves'..

Comment deleted

Jan 28 2013:
Kate, In some ways I agree with this device. It only targets those with guns. To better protect and perserve the officers can identify "potentials" and remove the threat. Not all bad. It is better that "frisking" 600,000 people on a "hunch" and it does take guns off the street.

From my experience in law enforcement ... I like it. Will it pass the legal test ... not my area.

I am happy for you that you live in a better place ... not all are so lucky.

Jan 28 2013:
It must be better than those porn scanners at the airports.

It's not the gun that they should be worried about, it's the concealed knife that kids are opting to carry, if this can pick them up to, then the cops should just disarm them and send them on their way.